HYPERBOREA » AS&SH Errata

Blackadder23 · 9/14/2015 11:48 am

It looks to me like the rogue portion of the wall of iron description actually refers to the next spell, wall of shadow. That spell has an almost-identical example given.

DMPrata · 9/14/2015 5:19 pm

Blackadder23 wrote:
It looks to me like the rogue portion of the wall of iron description actually refers to the next spell, wall of shadow. That spell has an almost-identical example given.

Yes, that's exactly the case. This seems to be an error that I introduced in the final proofing phase, by directing Jeff to change a passage in the wrong spell. The two spells should read as follows:

Wall of Iron
Level: mag 5; Range: 60 feet; Duration: permanent
Evokes a vertical iron wall to rise from the ground, typically to seal off passages or wall breaches. The wall must have appropriate anchor points to which to affix itself and cannot be made to stand in open space. The wall of iron is three inches thick and covers an area of up to 600 square feet (e.g., 20 feet high by 30 feet long). A wall of iron is destroyed by a dispel magic spell; otherwise it is permanent unless battered down.

Wall of Shadow
Level: mag 2, ill 2; Range: 60 feet; Duration: 1 round per CA level
From the Black Gulf the sorcerer conjures a barrier of shadow with a volume of 1,000 cubic feet per CA level. The wall must be 10 feet in thickness and 10 feet in height; only the length is malleable (e.g., a CA 7 sorcerer may create a 10 × 10-foot wall that is up to 70 feet long). The wall can be straight or form a semicircle. The wall of shadow is not impenetrable; persons and objects can be seen through the barrier, but they are vague, hazy, and nebulous. Missile fire directed at a person beyond the wall is at a −2 “to hit” penalty. Other benefits might be derived from this spell; e.g., a thief using his hide ability might gain a bonus to his chance-in-twelve, or perhaps even automatic success, at the referee’s discretion.

Ghul · 11/29/2015 3:50 pm

We have officially begun working on the next printing of the game, so if you've spotted any errata or ambiguities that require clarification, please speak up! Remember, this thread is for errors and the like, not a place to say, "Hey, dude, I think you should make my half-gelatinous cube, half githyanki, paragon assassin-paladin, forger a new race-class combo in the game!"

Chainsaw · 11/29/2015 6:20 pm

Ghul wrote:
Remember, this thread is for errors and the like, not a place to say, "Hey, dude, I think you should make my half-gelatinous cube, half githyanki, paragon assassin-paladin, forger a new race-class combo in the game!"

Great. There goes my best idea.

Rastus_Burne · 11/29/2015 7:01 pm

Chainsaw wrote:
Ghul wrote:
Remember, this thread is for errors and the like, not a place to say, "Hey, dude, I think you should make my half-gelatinous cube, half githyanki, paragon assassin-paladin, forger a new race-class combo in the game!"
Great. There goes my best idea.

I was thinking you could make these really cool "builds" as, like, pregen characters. But with awesome 12 page backstories.

Blackadder23 · 11/29/2015 7:45 pm

Ghul wrote:
"Hey, dude, I think you should make my half-gelatinous cube, half githyanki, paragon assassin-paladin, forger a new race-class combo in the game!"

Stop it, you're giving me the dry heaves.

Blackadder23 · 2/01/2016 12:52 pm

I was rereading the Referee's Manual for the [number redacted to avoid involuntary commitment) time and I noticed a couple of questionable phrases. These are really picky, to the point that I'm not sure they qualify as "wrong", so it's embarrassing to even mention them. But I know how genuinely concerned Jeff and Dave are with accuracy, so here goes.

On page 30, under the description of Class VI daemon, it reads, "Men who take orders from
the dæmon in no short order become Evil [emphasis mine]." The phrase "in short order" usually means "quickly", which I think was what was intended here ("in no time" would be another possibility). I've never really heard anyone use the phrase "in no short order" before, although it would seem to have the opposite of what I suppose to be the intended meaning. If this is a regionalism, or an example of Yankee humor, then please disregard my complaint.

On page 77, under the description of orc, it reads, "These despicable humanoids are the unhallowed progeny of swine dæmons and an abominable tribe of Picts [emphasis again mine]." Under the Skarag Coast entry on page 214, it says the hapless human forebears of the orcs were half-blood Picts (I take this latter statement to be correct, based on the geography involved). Now, perhaps "Pict" is being used in the general sense in the orc entry, to include half-blood Picts. Personally, I have no problem with such small poetic license, but given Dave's justly renowned interest in using precisely defined terms, I thought I would call attention to it in case it was of concern to him. Again, feel free to ignore me if the very minor ambiguity was intentional.

Wow, those are really picky. Sorry guys.

Ghul · 2/02/2016 6:16 am

I like p. 30 as is, but perhaps p. 77 can be clarified to reflect half-blood Picts. Thanks for taking note of these, BA23!

Last edited by Ghul (2/03/2016 7:39 pm)

Blackadder23 · 2/02/2016 11:22 am

You're welcome. The hardcover is going to be great!

Handy Haversack · 2/16/2016 8:46 am

This isn't really errata, but it might be useful to clarify the effects of monsters with class levels. E.g., snake-people: "Most snake-men adopt a class; typical examples include magician, illusionist, necromancer, monk, priest, and assassin. They can advance to 11th level, with HD gains beyond 1st level added to their base 2+2 HD."

How is CA affected by HD? Does it simply progress at the class rate, or is there a HD bonus. Same question for FA: whichever is better of HD or class ability?

Blackadder23 · 2/16/2016 9:31 am

Personally I would keep it simple and just say a monster with a PC class performs at that class level, period. So a low level snake-man magician would actually fight worse than an non-classed snake-man, which I think is fair. Magicians, even ones with scales, really shouldn't be engaging in combat.

mabon5127 · 2/16/2016 1:28 pm

Ghul wrote:
I like p. 30 as is, but perhaps p. 77 can be clarified to reflect half-blood Picts. Thanks for taking note of these, BA23!

Please clarify, as no full blooded Pict would lower himself to that level!!

Barnett1967 · 3/12/2016 1:48 pm

So, my two cents, page 14 of the Players' Manual - and mind you I'm not a literary giant in the least, but wouldn't "genetically" compatible, be more accurate than "sexually" compatible in regards to whether or not Atlanteans and Hyperboreans can procreate offspring with the other races?

Handy Haversack · 3/13/2016 4:15 pm

Barnett1967 wrote:
So, my two cents, page 14 of the Players' Manual - and mind you I'm not a literary giant in the least, but wouldn't "genetically" compatible, be more accurate than "sexually" compatible in regards to whether or not Atlanteans and Hyperboreans can procreate offspring with the other races?

But you'd lose all the romance!

http://hyperborea.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=519

Blackadder23 · 3/13/2016 4:31 pm

Jeff can speak for himself, but I assumed he was using a word that would be familiar to the ignorant savages of Hyperborea, who know nothing of these things you call "genes".

Although some people are of the opinion that Jeff means that the key actually no longer fits the lock (if you know what I mean, and I think you do). You'd have to ask him which it is.

Handy Haversack · 3/13/2016 5:22 pm

Blackadder23 wrote:
Jeff can speak for himself, but I assumed he was using a word that would be familiar to the ignorant savages of Hyperborea, who know nothing of these things you call "genes".

Although some people are of the opinion that Jeff means that the key actually no longer fits the lock (if you know what I mean, and I think you do). You'd have to ask him which it is.

My people say "sluice gate" and "cloaca."

Blackadder23 · 3/13/2016 5:28 pm

Handy Haversack wrote:
My people say "sluice gate" and "cloaca."

Thank God we narrowly avoided losing the romance.

mabon5127 · 3/14/2016 7:00 am

Handy Haversack wrote:
Blackadder23 wrote:
Jeff can speak for himself, but I assumed he was using a word that would be familiar to the ignorant savages of Hyperborea, who know nothing of these things you call "genes".

Although some people are of the opinion that Jeff means that the key actually no longer fits the lock (if you know what I mean, and I think you do). You'd have to ask him which it is.
My people say "sluice gate" and "cloaca."

Whew! <fans self>

Barnett1967 · 3/15/2016 8:42 am

I take my eyes off of the thread for one day, and it degenerates into juvenile remarks and innuendo... this forum is awesome!

Handy Haversack · 4/04/2016 2:18 pm

Under MAN, WILD BERSERKER, the No. Encountered is 4d10, but Chieftains appear in a 1:50 ratio. I might not be a fancy, big-city DM, but even I know that (4 X 10) < 50. Is this just a subtle dig at the MAN, WILD, BERSERKER political constituency? This ship she sails without a captain!